How's This for Excessive Spending?

As I am sure we all heard, there was a major tea party in D.C. this past weekend. The protesters complain about taxation and spending. They hate the Stimulus Package. They hate the health care bill. They hate foreign aid. They hate progressive taxes.

They also hate excessive government bureaucracy. I have one piece of excessive spending and government bureaucracy that no one has ever mentioned.

Next time you are hanging out in Downtown D.C., walk to the Department of Agriculture, then walk to the Department of Commerce, then Labor, and continue walking around to all of the cabinet-level departments that everyone forgets. Then, to finish it off, head to the Capitol. You will notice that each bureau has its own police force. I understand that each government office should have some security, but its own police force?

First off, I am curious to know who has the jurisdiction to prosecute someone who the, say Capitol police, arrest.

I do not know why there is a need for this much bureaucracy and excessive spending. But, however, our friends on the Right have never mentioned this. They seem to care more about social spending

Here is my solution to the police force issue: The President nominates a Governmental Police Commissioner that shall be in charge of all police forces within the government (with the exception of special cases such as Military Police forces and the Secret Service) and a joint committee of the House and Senate confirm. The Police Commissioner, then, appoints police chiefs for each department (i.e. Agriculture Department Police Chief). Those Chiefs, then, manage all of the police that are stationed in that department.

My plan gives a direct chain of command and provides necessary resources to other bureaus when needed (like when other police precincts are called to a scene). If there is a fault with my plan, please comment.

Let's see what the so-dubbed 'teabaggers' have to say about this.

Stimulate My Mind

At CPAC last weekend, there was a universal hatred of President Obama's bailout/economic-stimulus plans, sparked by comments by Rush Limbaugh. They all fear that the nation will become socialist. Do they realize how wrong they are?

1. This is a temporary program. It is not meant to last
2. Technically speaking, the government has always been socialist - Congress cannot pass laws that benefit only one person, laws are meant to help the most amount of people.
3. Do they really think that the government wants to take over the banks? The only group that can do less with repossessed houses than the banks is the government.
4. We must do something. Iceland has gone down the tubes, do you want the same to happen to the United States. At least Obama is trying to do something. When Obama was coming up with the stimulus plan, he did ask for Republican input. A certain College Republican that shall go unnamed says that those Republicans are, in fact, RINOs. At least, they are doing something than just sitting back and watching the nation itself fail.
   
5. After this economic situation, what will the Rush complain about next? Gays in the military? FOCA? He doesn't seem to be complaining much about that right now.

Rush also believes that Obama's plans will end individual liberties. How many individual liberties were taken by President Bush (*cough* 4^th Amendment *cough*)? That is what I thought.

---

While writing this post, I have been watching ABC's World News Tonight. They discussed this very issue. Yesterday, both Republican Chairman Michael Steel and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (VA) have distanced themselves from Limbaugh. Rush, today, attacked them saying that they cannot say that they represent the Republican party if they do not share his ideals. Is he serious (or just back on his pain medications so he can go golfing)? Just as this blog (nor I) does not represent the views of the Democratic Party, I doubt that Rush Limbaugh represents the GOP. I would like Mr. Limbaugh to find another person in the United States that agrees with EVERY SINGLE ISSUE as him. The United States (nor any political party) represents the views of every member, but is a plurality of a set of common ideals.

I pray that all of these lovers of partisanship will learn that nothing works with partisanship, but coming together on issues that we do agree on.